Not surprisingly you are wrong here. I have no thought about whether we can get Butler. I've mentally moved on from the pursuit all together and am more interested in the hilarity of the Minnesota freak show than anything. I don't have any interest in pointing out why it's good or bad for the Rockets. If anything I hope the Lakers get Butler instead of Kawhi or Durant I guess. Well I specifically said they couldn't do the trade because of not having enough salary and he said they'd use a third team. You interpret that however you want, I'll take it as a response to me mentioning the financial aspect. Anyway, there's no need for this. I was just discussing with Cod why I think his source's information won't ultimately work out. He doesn't need you guys defending him from an attack that isn't happening. I 100% believe Codman has a source/sources that give him information. That doesn't mean everything they hear will be valid information. I do NOT believe that the Wolves and Lakers are working out the specifics of a deal that wouldn't be consummated until December 15th that includes a 3rd team. Once again, if they are willing to trade Lonzo and Ball they don't NEED to wait until December 15th so it dissolves the whole issue.
OK, I have you down as saying the Lakers could very well have called Thibs....and that you believe you caught Cod in a technicality that proves they didn't call Thibs?
Wrong. I’m saying COD did not insinuate that they called Thibs about a December trade and that the source that told COD Lakers made an offer of a vet / young piece / a pick is full of it. EDIT: really that latter part is how it all started. And I stand by that. Lakers DID NOT make an offer of a vet, young piece and a pick
So according to what I guess codman is hinting at is that if we don’t land butler we could still possibly be in the mix to obtain other players. Which is all fine and great but my only concern is would that still mean parting with Eric Gordon?. Surely we wouldn’t trade EG for Taj and some scrubs huh? Hopefully that’s just means giving up picks and non factor players
Whatever happens with Jimmy B, it sounds like we will never really know what the Lakers propositions consist(ed) of, since Jimmy doesn't want to become the Scottie to Lebron's Jordan. Therefore, I'm glad Jimmy won't be a Laker.
This is hyperbole. Cod never said they were working on the specifics of a trade. Going hyperbolic like that, just makes your point weaker (to me). Cod said what the Lakers were offering, with no timeframe mentioned. See, I'm not following this. You didn't even enter the thread today until Cod and Zopi had hashed out several things. By the time he responded to you, it was in a very general manner about how they view Kuzma, comments on Lebron, and how a 3rd team can offer more value (in general terms). I didn't even take that as specific to the earlier trade news. Did you read that post to you as a technical reply to CBA salary-matching? If so, that's what I mean that you might be misreading replies to you by wrongly assuming the context of the answer. Here's my final comment on this: you were being CBA Police (which is good and helpful, don't get me wrong) about news that is pretty reasonable, since LAL would be interested indeed, and they have the assets -- and if they were to want to get in the game, after Pre-season ends (and Butler is now suiting up) seems pretty reasonable time to start. What you might have proven was that Cod doesn't know the CBA that well, but relied on his intel so much, he tried to answer Zop's questions with his amateur CBA knowledge, and you painted him into a corner. That's all you did. And it's helpful to others that you can frame news around what is legal and when. But none of that means the Lakers would wait to call until December, if they have strong interest and the assets. The news is still most definitely different that the news of yesterday wrt a minor piece in a Blockbuster deal causing a 2-month delay, when there are other immediate options, while also mentioning an actual timeframe.
@heypartner Honestly this is whats ridiculous about you and a lot of others. I keep bringing up the point of how posters change the narratives. When someone does that and comes at me I'll simply defend myself. There is nothing wrong with doing that and it doesn't mean I'm super heated or angry or taking it too seriously. I didn't reply with "COD everything you say is a lie" I didn't call him out on all the parts that I don't believe. I just shut down that one point because its simply not true. Yes I responded more than that after, but in response. First he said a young player can be a vet. So I pointed out even if thats the case that means the offer would have to be Ingram and Lonzo and there is no way thats the offer. Then he said its a 3 team trade. Which I, and gladly someone else willing to point out facts, said they would still have to come close to matching salaries so it doesn't change much. Then I think you know how the rest went. So instead of using technicalities as you see fit, read what I quoted: "LAL offered a youngin, a vet and a pick," and let me know....(trying to be careful with my words so you don't bring in a new argument)...let me know what you think an offer that Magic/Pelinka would propose to Thibs that fits that description could be.
I mean, dude, this is the absolutely most probable trade the Lakers would discuss in order to dangle a carrot to take Thibs eye off the ball. What you are actually saying is the Lakers wouldn't get on the phone to discuss their *only* option, because we are not in December, yet. So, new question: When would the Lakers discuss that offer, should this drag out. Dec 1st? Nov 15th? Nov 1st?
If Cod responded with "I never mentioned timeframes" I would simply say "doubt teams agree to trades two months away and in that case it probably was more a question of whether Minny would hold onto Jimmy rather than an 'offer'". And then the back and forth would have ended. But he didn't say that, and not only did he not say that, he brought up the "3 team trade idea"
Why do you never answer simple questions? It's the hallmark of someone who is making a weak argument, btw. Here's me repeating a simple question again: When would the Lakers discuss that obvious offer, should this Butler saga drag out. Dec 1st? Nov 15th? Nov 1st?
Per MY sources, HP3 is on the move and is prepared to get involved in said argument as he's very fluid. Yoo-ill See.
Seriously the possibilities of that proposal is endless. I’m not sure why your shocked by it?. Teams can offer things and wolves can not accept it. Doesn’t mean it wasent offered though just because you think it’s a weak offer. Are you another holic clone?
Are ya'll seriously still arguing over this s***? "Last word!" "Noooooooo, no........last word." "Don't even try it.........last word. Quitsies, no anti-quitsies, no startsies!"
